https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43859
Jason Merrill changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
--- Comment #5 from bergner at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-23 16:24 ---
Sorry, I meant type attribute where I mentioned variable attribute.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43859
--- Comment #4 from bergner at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-23 16:15 ---
Interesting, using:
union __attribute__ ((transparent_union)) q
{
unsigned n;
unsigned get_n () const { return n; }
};
does seem to cure it. However, is the attribute location really incorrect? It
s
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-22 22:48 ---
I think you have the attribute in the wrong location.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43859
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-22 22:44 ---
Looks like the front-end is messing up how transparent_union is done anyways.
It is creating a variant which is just bogus. It should be the main variant.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
